Expanded Role of HQ with Advance and Retreat After Combat -- and ADMIRALS!

[KDG]

Stacking, we don't need no stinking stacking.

Interesting forum, and only Hubert knows if the game engine can handle all this.

Two comments on all possible changes.

I just want to be able to finish my turn in 3-5 minutes. That is the key to the game for me, and makes PBEM and playing the computer so possible.

Secondly, make sure the AI can handle all this and still be a good opponent.

[JerseyJohn]

Liam

Good Game Plan. You're still young, if the main item being sought is cooking and house cleaning don't just look for a wife, look for one with an attached mother. A wife in her mid to late twenties that comes with a mother-in-law in late middle age, preferably a widow with no intention of remarrying, is the ideal solution.

Snoop around their dwelling a bit, if it's always immaculate and the food is good you've got it beat. Ask the prospective mother-in-law if she'd be willing to stay on after the marriage, etc..

The downside is you'll always be in the doghouse with two women constantly teaming up against you and everything you want to do. A good counter-plan is to let them cook and clean and put you the doghouse, then sneak out with the boys for a good time and bitch about the old ball and chain.

You may have to endure this for a few decades but they'll be spent in clean surroundings and with good food. Try to have about five kids in first six years and use the children as a buffer between yourself and the wife/mother-in-law alliance. Make it a wargame; the kids are cannon fodder. Eventually the aggravation will be spread out equally among the entire family and you'll have those rotten kids with the old ball and chain and her wicked witch mother stories to share with your friends over a poker game.

If you play your cards right you'll eventually die without ever having washed a dish or prepared a meal. No doubt the mother-in-law will be there in her late ninties crying on the casket, missing all those heated discussions that kept the house lively and realizing her sparring partner is gone forever.

Or, you can look for superficial things in a woman, like companionship and love or even lust; but I think eating and clean surroundings are preferable.

[ March 11, 2003, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

Valadictum & KDG

Attack and Defense will equalize. Actually, using this method would help defense as much as offense as the added HQ combat values are only defensive.

Sure, Airmarshalls are fine. Fieldmarshall Albert Kesselring, a high level German HQ in SC, is actually a Luftwaffe Officer.

These changes won't turn the game into a nuclear physics problem, it isn't advanced calculus.

If the AI can't handle all this, well, it can't handle what's already in the game. It needs to be improved.

This sort of system would fit in and wouldn't make the game significantly more complicated from the players viewpoint, only more interesting.

[ March 11, 2003, 05:32 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[SeaWolf_48]

Jersey

Your philosophy of marriage is funny, sounds like some home spun experience.

I went the route of raising the kids, getting divorced and becoming a bachelor/golfer, and if the girlfriend does not like it....well!

[JerseyJohn]

SeaWolf

It is pretty much a true story, except for the kids. If I had the funds I'd adopt some as a diversionary tactic.

Sounds like you've got the middle game worked out perfectly.

Just finished dinner, my eighty-five year old mother-in-law won't let me near the pots and pans so I'm never allowed to cook. She's the same way about washing things, thinks she's the only one who knows how slosh dishes in hot water and hit them with a cleaning pad. Adding insult to injury she won't allow anyone to do the housework. Talk about oppression. So here I am online again with the sound of running water in the next room and an old Lady's joyful humming. It isn't fair, of course, I should be allowed to help out and perhaps tomorrow I'll really put my foot down and insist on washing the dishes or something. I did say tomorrow, right? :eek:

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

As always I am the odd one I suppose.

My wife gives me "action" twice a day, and I wargame whenever I want.

I wonder what it is I am doing right .

When I figure out the secret though, I will let you guys know.

Sure is cool having my cake and eatng it too.

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

Back to SC yeah that's what the thread is about now that I think of it.

I agree throw in airmarshalls too.

Hey no one has said a player is going to have HQs looking like Marshalls Admirals, Air marshalls all at the same time, and be able to buy superfluous troops and all that with no one looking eh.

Kesselring ran the show in the Med. So he was an Airman so what. He was likely in game terms the only German HQ in the Mediteranean theatre as well. No land HQ no Admirals just him.

There would have to be benefits to choosing an Airmarshall type HQ, but the cash supply would certainly limit how many total HQs a side could actually have all at the same time eh.

[ March 11, 2003, 07:20 PM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1b ]

[Valadictum]

Another way to resolve the problem of SC becoming like WWI would be to use the experience bars on the units more. Such as to gain extra attack and extra defence thus simulating what stacking would do without actually having to stack units.

0 & 1 experience bar - one attack or one defence.

2 experience bars - an extra attack as though at half strength and in defence always have +1 to entrenchment and the choice of retreating one hex in good order.

3 experience bars - in attack turn the extra half attack into a full air attack to represent direct tactical air support for the attacking army. In defence have +1 entrenchment and an extra counter attack at half strength to simulate well hidden artillery positions.

4 experience bars - in attack on top of previous a unit could be able to move one hex after attacking. In defence you could have extra air defence in addition to previous.

Of course however experienced a unit is it should only benefit from the above while supported by an HQ unit.

I reckon this might be enough to lever open the walls of corps that SC turns into in mid-late game and it would require less changes than adding stacking (which some like and some don't).

Speaking about marriage - I've never figured it out! :eek:

[Shaka of Carthage]

JeseyJohn

Where were you forty years ago? Then again, I wouldn't have listened to your advice regarding a wife and mother-in-law, since I was too busy "sowing my oats".

There is alot a truth in what you say, maybe some of the younger group will listen to it.

I've given up looking for the wife bit (two failed ones), my thing now is that when I die, I want a couple of twenty year old women crying on my casket, missing all those moments of lust that kept the house lively and realizing her love bunny is gone forever.

[JerseyJohn]

Shaka

That image of the casket and the two beautiful young girls crying, it, it, sorry, ... can't stop crying myself now, really sorry . . . thirty years ago, like yourself, I was also sowing those horrible wild oats and no doubt ignoring the very same advice I'm so freely dispensing now. As for forty years ago, ah, those were the days my friend!

Les, You lucky dog! :cool:

Actually, Kessering had his HQ while Rommel would have been one with the Africa Corps and later when Rommel was briefly in Northern Italy -- twice a day and . . . hmmmmm

Validictum I don't think any guy is allowed to figure it out. Those who think they have either die deluded or wake up one day in a cold sweat realizing they never had a clue.

I think your game idea about experience would be good only if we can have multiple units attacking an adjacent hex simultaneous and afterwards being able to attack it individually. Then a fresh reserve unit could be brought up to occupy the vacated area or attack through it.

[ March 11, 2003, 10:31 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

It ain't all roses, I do most of the housework (well I need it to occupy me wen not wargaming or etc).

Sowing wild oats, can't relate to that though.

Never sowed anything myself.

I picked a winner on the first try. Good judge I guess (which exlains why I am a tricky wargamer hehe, I can smell a good choice ).

[Tigleth Pilisar]

Jersey. Love the stacking idea. And completely agree with your assessment of the WWI attrition combat problems aspect of the game (which has caused air power to lack historical authenticity and has become the key breakthrough mechanism).

Questions:

1)Do you need a HQ to stack units? Why not have them stackable on their own?

2) Did you say all three (including HQ) units have their attributes combined? Why not have each unit attack on its own? Just two conventional attacks at once (HQ has no offence) instead of one mega attack.

3) If you use combined defense (all three units add to one total), you have a unit that can't be attacked except by another stacked unit (because the defense will be so high compared to a single unit offense). I think the attacker could choose which defender to go after. HQ wouldn't be a choice until all stacked units are dead. Reasonably easy to implement.

4) Agree with the tank movement for HQ. Why wouldn't they have mechanized movement?

5) Don't think there is enough value to creating an "Air Marshall" unit. Interesting, but the game already allows HQ units to command Air units - not perfect, but simple and reasonable enough.

6) I like the idea of Admirals, but the allies pretty much rule the seas already. I doubt they'd need 2 Admirals out of the gate. What kind of ship would they be on? Similar stats to a land HQ, with cruiser movement? Only command the units they are stacked with? Or do they command 5 units (which I think is too many)?

7) Retreating. Not sure about this one. The game currently does not reflect morale (maybe readiness is a proxy?). I think you'd agree that routing and retreat has more to do with morale than unit size (and damage, although they are related). Also, zones of control should affect retreat. Friendly units within a hex should strengthen resolve to take punishment, while enemy units within a hex should increase the chance of panic. I don't like retreat being a simple matter of math (kill so many units and you know the enemy will run). Retreat is more complex. Also, tank overrun may also increase retreat chance. Just some thoughts...

[JerseyJohn]

Tigleth Pilsar

Glad you like the idea and I like the points you've brought up. That's the sort of thing I was hoping for at the start, give and take on the subject because the details weren't entirely clear in my own mind.

Agreed about Air Marshalls, I was mostly being fecitious to someone else's remark. The present Land HQ already controls air units and to me that's fine.

Admirals, if there's an interest in them, would need to go in a different Thread. I wanted to establish the idea, but really, if discussed with the usual intensity these topics get, it would knock everything out of whack. Admittedly, an only half thought out idea to get discussions going. To me an Admiral would do all the things for ships that HQs do for land units. Beyond that, it's off to it's own Thread. If nobody takes it there during the next few days, I will. But I'd rather have someone else do so as it's best to spread topics around.

I thought it would be best to have units stack only with HQs so the original non-stacking idea would be dominant. The map would be mainly dotted with single units and there'd be a few stacks at odd intervals. The HQ stacks would be primarily used as a break-through unit.

The HQ would still be controlling three other units. Ideally the player would himself assign which unit are controlled by which HQ. The computer would assign units to an HQ only when the Human fails to.

Also, the idea was to allow the stacked HQ to direct it's five units, if within three hexes, in a unified assault on one defender all five units are adjacent to. A combined assuault can be the average of all the attacking units with the HQs experience and readiness values. Casualties would be absorbed by the HQ, representing distribution of reserves as replacements. After the assault, the units involved could conduct their own individual attacks, including the two that are stacked. If the hex is vacated, one of the adjacent units or the stack should advance into it. The attacking player should decide which unit will advance.

Excellent point about the combined value of a stack. It should be changed to individual values. In an attack the strongest unit (computer decides) attacks first. In defense, the combat units defend first, individually with the computer determing in each received attack which combat unit is stronger and therefore the defender. The HQ itself would defend only after the combat units have been eliminated.

Advance and retreat after combat would add greater maneuver and, in North Africa may be the only way to dislodge or significantly weaken a defender -- no retreat, heavier losses.

Main Clarification/revision Units in stacks fight as individual units. All five combat units controlled by an HQ can engage in a combined assault upon a mutually adjacent defender. The three unstacked combat units must be nor more than three hexes from the HQ stack; the controlling HQ does not need to be part of a stack to direct combined assault, nor adjacent to the attacked hex, but it must be within two hexes of the attack and all participating units mus be within three hexes of the HQ. Casualties from the combined assault must be taken from the HQ, but never if it causes the unit to fall below 2 points, in which case the stronges attacking unit absorbs the shortfall.

That would be the combined assault rule as I see it.

As said earlier, what I'm trying to do is get something along these lines into existence. If somebody has a better idea than the one presented I have no problem in going with that one.

So, we have it established now that the units within the stack fight individually. I've tried to make the combined assault suggestion a bit more clear and I'm sure there are still loose ends that I haven't noticed.

Looking forward to your response. This reexamination was a tremendous help. If you could start the Thread on Admirals it would be a great help. You've got fine ideas on the topic and others would join in, I'm sure. At least I will and I'm sure the Old Salts will get involved right away!

Also, it's good to get away from the topic of mothers-in-law.

[ March 12, 2003, 03:34 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[disorder]

so a stack attacks a city hex, do other nearby single attackers get the bonuses as well?

an admiral would be purchased as a normal headquarters, but would have to be immediately designated (check box or drop-down box) as to which ship he is on. this would allow him to transfer "the flag" if his ship is in trouble. the headquarters here would have to parralel the land rules if possible.

i personally think that there should be different headquarters available, perhaps a limited # from the beginning, with some better than others.random? maybe. there was a vast difference when rommel was in your army as opposed to montgomery.(sorry not trying to put down the british race)

i.m.h.o.,even doenitz was a better than average planner/commander and would have done better than most with a land army of his own.

anyone want to explain the mechanics of pbem to a novice? failed miserably the first time.

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

Yes I agree with "units fight individually".

As it currently stands, it is merely just the impossibility of getting more than one unit into the same hex, so that one can be the initial assault unit, and the other the unit that punches the hole.

To take two units and add them together in a single mega roll of the dice, is perhaps to severe a design alteration (not to mention it isn't needed).

[John DiFool]

Hmm from the defensive side of things, wouldn't

the Russians be forced to build a few HQs of

their own, just to defend against the breakthroughs?

Is this a good thing?

A corps-building strategy probably would prove

inadequate in the long run, against this HQ

stacking tactic.

John DiFool

[Desert Dave]

Terrific RIFF on the beleaguered Male, JJ!

LOL!

One can nearly hear... the blue-note catastrophe clash of... Miles Davis... lingering in the background, like little Shoo-Shrew birds tripping on an apron-string...

... although,

Latest research from Bio- and Psycho- and Socio- realms... :eek:

The current Western Female is becoming ever more INDEPENDENT... of monetary inducement, of old patriarchal imaging, AND

Of American Males in general... just a cautionary note, ah, so la, perhaps it is Charlie Parker listless on the slam-street lam...

But, the current generation of Go! Getters might have to appreciate that the current generation of not so easily Begottens...

Do not heark & cotton to the old ways of slick seduction... well, I don't have to worry... I wonder who does?

Wish to work, co-exist, co-ingratiate, with a Female boss?

[JerseyJohn]

Immer

Your take on it rings true my friend. One can certainly hear Masters Parker and Davis and friends wailing laments in that great, smokey Blue Note in the sky; sorrowed at the plight of the contemporary American male.

Countless millions, life-long blue collars like myself, have become obsolete. It doesn't pay to rehash the details but, though this country believes totally in equal opportunity, males over fifty are not included!

The only wise thing I ever did was to marry a woman devoted to her job (which means I get to spend more time on my projects without having to worry about making a fortune) with a darling mother who loves to do all the housework and cooking herself. The end result, I sit around like an unused manual typewriter, of occasional use but really one step away from a garage sale.

Yes Brothers Davis and Parker, and you too Cannonball, the Blues is what we're doing -- of course you can jam with them, Hector Beriloz and Benny Goodman, it's called Blues for the extinct Macho Man in B-flat minor. No repeat signs as it's all too depressing in single chorus.

That's it fellas, mellow and sad. Ah, here comes Chet Baker and Igor Stravinsky . . ..

[ March 12, 2003, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

disorder

The idea was for the (up to) five combat ground units controled by the HQ to attack a hex they're all adjacent to, including the ones in the stack, using their combined factors averaged into a single joint attack. Afterwards those same units can attack the same hex individually (again, including the two in the stack). If this clears it, and it almost certainly should, the attacker can advance one of the attacking units into the vacated hex. It would probably be the stack, but doesn't have to be.

Personally I don't know if lost HQs reappear in the unit menu. It would be easy enough to find out, but if anyone knows offhand I like to find out. If this rule were adapted I think I think your suggestion would be a good one. It's come up a few times in the past and your idea is the one I've always gone for. Blank HQs to be named by the player with values assigned by the computer at a given range according to the producing country. i.e., the Germans might get one with a range of anywhere from 6-9; the Frence 3-4; the Italians 4; the Russians 4-9, and so on. Admirals would be a bit different, British and Americans 7-9, Germans 6-9, French & Italians 5-9, Russians 3-6 (lack of doctrine).

Did you say you were having problems with PBEM? You need to E-mail the game file back and forth to your opponent as an attachment with each of you using a code word to open the .sav file during your turn. The easyiest way of keeping track of them is to assign names like PBEM(Axis Players initials)(Allied Players Initials).sav

[ March 12, 2003, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

Les

That was an important point about having the units fight individually. I'm glad Tigleth Pilsar pressed the issue as it was unclear in my own mind. Now I think it sounds more workable.

[JerseyJohn]

John DiFool

Exactly. It would force the Russians to employ something better than lines of corps. They have plenty of HQ units, now they'll get to use them. As neither side can get by with a long static defense, the Eastern Front would become long lines of temporary defenses, mostly armies, with stacks cetering offensives and counter offensives and there will be a realy possibility of pockets being cut off and surrounded by pincer movements.

Sounds a bit like the real Eastern Front, doesn't it?

[disorder]

ah the light goes on o dopey me

must have missed that one in the translation.

thanks for the advice for pbem. hopefully hotmail attachments will work with their limited size.

[JerseyJohn]

disorder

Not so dopey, I still don't understand how to hook up to the IP mode.

With hotmail you may have to compress (zip, winzip) the .sav file before sending, then unzip it before being able to use it. This is an added inconvenience and I'd try sending it unzipped first; if you can get by doing it that way you're much better off. Zipping them doesn't save a tremendous amount of space, but sometimes it's necessary.

[disorder]

JERSEYJOHN what had happened was a file the program couldn't read was in the pbem folder, and ergo it didn't work. it's workin now!

you know i think immer is right about the scope of the different suggestions for sc2. i was thinkinking(scary isn't it), and what the end result of my thoughts would have been was a poor steel panthers ripoff. very few original or workable ideas huh?

"Genetically, more Republicans are rich than Democrats." Tom Daschle (REAL QUOTE)

[JerseyJohn]

disorder

Thoughts are always scary!

Glad the file situation worked out well.

Immer, Macon and a few others always offer suggestions that are feasable and interesting. When I first came in I suggested things that were much wider in scope and that I'd still like to see, but it's become apparent that scaling suggestions down as close as possible to the current SC is the best course.

Fortunately there are a lot of people now like Shaka and KDG and Arby who have been coming up with new slants on things. One of the benefits is the Old Guard, guys like Immer and Bill, come forward with increased input and revision.

There are a hundred people I didn't mention, Les and Liam and Kur88, Wolfe and SeaWolf -- sorry for the dozens of names I haven't mentioned. I left my own name off in order to hang out with you overlooked guys.

I'm feeling very certain that some great stuff is on the way.

[ March 12, 2003, 07:39 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]